[LLVMdev] code-owner sporks

[dag at cray.com]

Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> writes:

>> Really, patches get dropped *all the time* to the point where pings are
>> a regular part of the development process.  That's a huge waste of time
>> for everyone.
>
> It's only a waste of time if your workflow is entirely synchronous
> with patch review. Most of us have a number of things that we can work
> on, so letting a patch chill for a while on the list isn't a big deal
> because we just go on and do something else.

Of course, that's easier with git.  :)

> Also, this situation has piqued my interest and so I am researching
> the issues involved. Could you give me some links (or thread titles)
> for dropped patches, so that I can take a look at them and try to
> puzzle out how the development process ended up in them being dropped?
> Nothing big, maybe 5 or so is probably enough. Thanks.

Really?  Ok...

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155173.html
Ping Request (couldn't find an actual review)

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155174.html
Ping Request (couldn't find an actual review)

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155233.html
Never reviewed?

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155267.html
Never reviewed?

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155318.html
Ping Request (looks like it got reviewed shortly after the ping)

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121105/155389.html
Reviewed five days later (I think).

The mailing list interface makes it difficult to look for the things you
requested, but all of these examples occurred just last week.

                                    -David